That's fine: he wasn't talking to them. Nor was he talking about them in any way shape or form. A lot of people seem upset at the founders, feeling betrayed, but such people need to get over it: that's already happened. Facebook could ruin this thing before it gets off the ground, all in a shortsighted attempt to keep people from leaving facebook. That has not yet happened.

My immediate reaction to seeing Facebook was buying it was "well, there goes some promising technology". Instead, it will be used to check in with your friends on Facebook and to ensure they're monetizing everything you can do with it.

Huh, that was exactly my reaction too. Odd how I read that IBM/MIcrosoft/Facebook/Oracle bought another tech company the first reaction I get is exactly this.

Interestingly when I hear that Google bought a company I don't get this reaction (yet).

Also where is Carmack? If he is still with Oculus then there might be some hope. But if they sold out without his vote, well there is something very wrong. John Carmack has being know to be someone uncompromising when it comes to tech.

That may be, but he would probably leave (now or soon) Oculus/Facebook if it did not shown any promise. I would have grabbed the money and ran away at the earliest possible date and fund another startup.

Interestingly when I hear that Google bought a company I don't get this reaction (yet).

I'm at that point however. I have a Nest thermostat which I love, but now that Google owns it I'm wondering what my options are. I'd love it if I could break into it and load my own firmware, or even an opensource firmware. I think the JTAG pins are exposed as pads on the main board so I should (in theory) have some access, I just have to figure out what exactly that access is...

My reaction when Google buys something is, "Ewww, now Google will know how I [whatever]." Example: I had been strongly considering a Nest thermostat, but there is NO WAY I want Google to have heuristic information about the goings-on in my house.

Well but at least they put the tech to good use, google docs for example started after an acquisition. Google docs is very useful in my life (but I don't put anything that I would rather keep private there).

Both exactly like, and somewhat different, from how you do it on a web page.

You really think Facebook has altruistic motives here? Or that they see a potential cash cow in the future?

Of course they see a future cash cow. Why would they not?! As for my original question, that's a dumb answer and you know it. They have no reason to spend 2 BILLION just to sell you a VR headset so you can.... what? Read Facebook posts? Most likely they, like Microsoft and the XBox, are trying to branch out into a new (for them) industry.

I'm really amazed at the complete lack of critical thinking on/. these days. Everyone is a shill for [insert company you hate here] and every new anything is obviously

You seem to be confusing paranoia with critical thinking. They are not the same. Many/.'ers lately are just default to crap like that, and it takes away from the validity of things that are real threats. It's gone from a site for geeks to a site for paranoid Luddites.

Facebook won't last that long. I know they have cash in the bank but even they see it. They buy WhatsApp not because they never thought of making a SMS like app or integrate it into their stuff, they want the head count. Facebook was cool to my generation because you could check out all the people you knew from years gone by but it is like any popular hangout or bar, eventually people will buy their beer somewhere else.

When you or anyone else here was younger how many would go to hangout somewhere wh

"My immediate reaction to seeing Facebook was buying it was "well, there goes some promising technology"."

Everyone still loves the VR idea though. I think Notch and all the others will just be looking for the runner up product. Which all the Me-To folks are working on. Sony and Xbox are already on that train, I understand. Hopefully there will be someone to sell me one without a walled garden that they're trying to push.

How much IP is there around the oculus? I understood the rift to be mostly an implementation of better / newer technology, not so much new invention, but I could be off. How hard will it be for others to pick up the baton?

Bingo, my friend. As soon as I read the headline last night, my heart sunk, and my hopes for Oculus died. I want nothing to do with Facebook owning them or their technology - the moment Zuck & Crew become a part of my gaming experience, I'm moving on. I don't mind Candy Crush - I get it, Facebook integration is a big part of what they do. I don't mind it in many other phone games. I do not link my FB to Call of Duty, GTA, or anything else on a console or that doesn't run in a browser (and mostly don't o

Carmack probably is stuck unless he wants to forego a payout(so-called golden handcuffs). Likely he has a time based contract that vests a payout over time. Leave now and lose tens of millions. Leave in 2 years and vest some/all of it.

Man, and I was so excited they the developer iteration was 1080 resolution and only $350. If that reflects potential commercial pricing, and you look at other existing HMDs at that resolution, then that's actually pretty awesome.

Carmack appreciates impressive technologies when he sees them and has always humbly voiced his support for them. Back in the dark ages he called Ken Silverman, the developer of Duke3D's Build engine -- the supposedly direct competitor of Quake at one point -- the most talented graphics programmers that he knew besides himself. He had similar praise of Oculus VR before he joined the crew.

No, he's isn't a saint in any benevolent sense, but when it comes to commentary on developing technologies, I tend to trust him -- personal disdain for Facebook's sociocommercial business model aside.

Also, Carmack's next Twitter post directly communicates that he's been avoiding creating a Facebook profile up until this point. So perhaps his admiration of the company on a social level is not as strong as his respect for them on a technological infrastructural level.

Carmack works on what he finds interesting. Right now VR is something that he is really passionate about. This deal almost gives him infinite resources to do that work. He doesn't need the money or the job and he will stay exactly as long as he is interested in the tech. I think he cares little how the tech is used just as long as he in on the cutting edge of developing it.

Well I want to decide for myself what to plug my goggles into, and not have it be a Facebook Accessory. That's my big beef with smart phones and why I still don't have one. The idea of a pocket computer sounded awesome 15 years ago, but they're so wrapped up with the carriers and walled gardens that the appeal is lost to me. You are monitored at every step. And now that's the future of OR.

That is EXACTLY what Oculus was trying to do. The current dev kits work on OSX and Windows, iOS/Android support is also planned...

There's no reason to think any different is true under Facebook. In fact if you think about it, almost no other company would be as likely to keep the device cross-platform as Facebook - certainly Google and Apple would have each dragged it back to their respective lairs to horde.

You're right. I've been waiting for the new record holder to arise for worst corporate merger ever and this might be it. According to Forbes and everyone in the entire US, the AOL - Time Warner merger was the worst merger in US history. Facebook buying and within 24 hours ruining a popular tech project and soon completely bankrupting and canceling the entire acquisition may just beat it.

There was a study a while back (I wish I had the link) that found that more money can make you happy, but only if you're not already born into money. And Notch himself has said in an interview that he basically accepts that his biggest achievement is now behind him.

The happiest people in the world aren't the ones who are driven by ambition; they're the ones who can realize that they've achieved something and then stop and enjoy life. Notch is doing what he loves to do, because he can afford to do that. H

I can't help but find it ironic that an alleged general truth about a demographic seems to actually only very rarely be true when you start trying to apply it to specific individuals in that demographic... rather, it only seems to apply to the group as a collective whole.

I'm certain there's a connection between that and the Pareto principle, somewhere. Which itself can seem ironic on the surface too, I suppose.

From the Oculus VR Forums [oculusvr.com] (which you should really read some of to get a better balanced view of how the actual developers feel).

spire8989 writes:

"Hi, I'm a developer and am very happy with this news. Also, Markus is a pretty well-known hipster, this is very expected from him. For someone who seems so anti-Facebook he should really stop having an active Facebook account that he constantly updates though. If you actually read this article you'll see where he says that this will have a positive impact on social VR experiences, but he doesn't want to work with them "because he doesn't know their intentions".

I guess you get to be picky and complain when you have an extremely popular game."

For someone who seems so anti-Facebook he should really stop having an active Facebook account that he constantly updates though

I have no problem with using Facebook for things where I want to share things with many people with no expectation of privacy, Shared events, products I'm interested in, public life announcements, FB is fine.

What I *don't* do is use the app on my phone (contact-stealing), allow their site-cookies, or buy other products that are NOT related to my intended use of FB.

You can both have reasons to use FB and reasons to avoid/dislike it that aren't necessarily at odds.

I guess you get to be picky and complain when you have an extremely popular game.

Yes that's exactly what you get to be. Why this is seen as some negative is beyond me. Notch built his company from nothing and hasn't taken investment or any of the number of things most companies want to do. He has enough money to tell anyone he wants "fuck you" and has every right to as a business owner. There's nothing wrong with that.

Oculus isn't the only VR headset. They may be the current best (I don't actually know). At least conceptually, the inputs and outputs are reasonably understood. So what makes it hard for an application that supports the Oculus headset to support others?

So what makes it hard for an application that supports the Oculus headset to support others?

You can easily provide a similar 3D view across multiple headsets.

What makes it hard to deliver the same application is all of the hardware that gets added to do tracking really well and keep latency very low. The 2nd dev kit has some advanced positional tracking hardware to help keep the view in sync with what the users head is doing, and also (perhaps just as important) built-in hardware to be able to test latency

One thing to realize is that Notch really never had any plans of making a VR port of Minecraft. In the past, he has stated that because of the JAVA technology used in Minecraft, it was too difficult to do it right, and they were having a problem making the UI work. They weren't very thrilled with the way the Minecrift mod did it, and wanted to do it better, but it just wasn't possible.

(In fact, the Minecrift mod doesn't even work with anything higher than 1.6, which means you can only use it in singleplayer or on servers that never upgraded. This is because of how much things have changed in the code between 1.6 and 1.7.)

So, Notch actually abandoned the effort sometime last year.

Last year: "We aren't making a Rift port because it's just too difficult with our current codebase."Yesterday: "We aren't making a Rift port because Facebook."

To me, it sounds like a convenient excuse to cover up the fact that their codebase is really messy and can't do as much as they wish it could. We can blame it on Zuck now!

Anyone that pays someone to make money with no expectations in return is a fool.

Expectation: Pay money and get promised reward.

I'm pretty sure they met the expectation for that project. As for them "selling out", well duh. The vast majority of their funding came from their VC rounds, not kickstarter. VCs are usually looking for an exit and these days want to control burn rate until they get to there. Honestly they are probably better off now with Facebook. FB will want to get the product to market, where the VCs wanted to get the COMPANY to market.

You seem to be operating under the assumption facebook will continue to develop the oculus rift as intended and is not buying it simply to obtain some piece of IP they want to bastardize and use in some way to monetize its existing user base further.

I strongly suspect the only oculus rift gaming devices to ever see market, are the ones that are already in the hands of developers and kickstarter backers we should expect this to more likely appear in some other form of social tool that in no way appeals to the original audience of oculus

You seem to be operating under the assumption facebook will continue to develop the oculus rift as intended and is not buying it simply to obtain some piece of IP they want to bastardize and use in some way to monetize its existing user base further.

I strongly suspect the only oculus rift gaming devices to ever see market, are the ones that are already in the hands of developers and kickstarter backers we should expect this to more likely appear in some other form of social tool that in no way appeals to the original audience of oculus

I'm not the only one. If you read the founders Reddit posts they also appear to be under that assumption. Also, what possible IP could facebook want from Oculus that would be worth that much to them? That just does not make sense. They are not buying a user base, like with What'sApp. Aquiri-hire also doesn't make any sense here. They bought a hardware company. They (Oculus) is already saying that they are planning to start work on custom hardware components (versus being tied to off-the-shelf parts for mobile phones), and part of the deal terms was to allow them to lower the final cost of the consumer hardware. The more likely explanation is that they (Facebook) want to branch out into an emerging tech. I don't see it any differently than Microsoft developing the XBox. Just because they are a social company doesn't mean that's ALL they can do. It would be smart of Zuck to branch out. He, like the rest of the world, has to know that social platforms have a shelf life and if Facebook wants to survive they need to start doing other things.

what possible IP could facebook want from Oculus that would be worth that much to them?

Technologies that allow them to directly compete with things like google glass? the oculus is a vr console that has lower lag than any other vr headset ever made, seems to me that's the piece they wanted and its more likely to end up in augmented reality displaying us advertisements and convincing us to like things than FB going from a platform for casual gaming to producing tech geared towards hardcore gamers.

I'm not the only one. If you read the founders Reddit posts they also appear to be under that assumption.

Ok explain to me what possible scenario they would post "Dude we're f***ing rich we sold our tech to a creativity grave yard, thanks for the support early on screw you guys i'm going home (to my new home on my private island)"

Of course the founders are saying that, facebook probably even portrayed it to them in that way, but i severely doubt FB will enter the gaming market i am confident that this technology will end up in the IP Graveyard of a giant corporation

Why? Again, it makes zero sense. They might as well burn a pile of cash and stock certificates on their parking lot. They have no IP of any real value to Facebook. What you are saying is that Facebook is going to hand them $2 billion ($400 million of that in cash), and immediately shut them down. That, versus that FB sees the potential for the VR market to be huge and that Zuck wants to get in on the ground floor of it?

Hell, considering how much VC money they had already taken in and they were still str

If you want to see the future of the internet, go read Snow Crash by Neil Stephenson. All these guys did - Carmack, Zuck, the Google guys - whatever, and they've all been trying to make Stephenson's Metaverse come to life ever since. Think of it as a kind of Burnham plan [wikipedia.org] for the internet.

Facebook is trying to produce the Metaverse, just like everyone before them, and the Oculus Rift will be the first incarnation of the Metaverse's headset.

The companies you work with say a lot about your priorities. I think it's fair to send a message to Oculus that a cash grab with a company with completely different models and motivations does not speak well of their priorities.

Why can't you think about it THAT way? It means the same thing as what you are saying. Why can't Facebook be changing course? WhatsApp and Oculus purchases make MORE sense if that is the case, not less.

Minecraft isn't making the social side, its userbase is. That's why the myriad videos of let's-play are on youtube, the streaming sessions are on Twitch and announced on twitter, etc. and not on some huge (and bloated) "social network" service hosted on minecraft.net

"Not one hour after the announcement of the the acquisition of Oculus Rift by Facebook yesterday, Markus 'Notch' Persson has announced that he has ceased all discussions about bringing it to Oculus Rift."

It? WHAT is 'it'?

Steven King novel. Frankly, I'm not entirely disappointed that a homicidal supernatural clown isn't being brought to virtual reality. Those are nightmares I'd just as soon do without.

Notch doesn't owe you any more work. He's already hired a bunch of people to continue development on Minecraft, so any obligations he might have for the Minecraft community are fulfilled. If he wants to spend the rest of his life sipping mixed drinks on an island somewhere, that's his prerogative.